On the other hand...

"People who know it all have a lot to learn," is a quote I picked up (or made up) a while back. If I had a dollar for every time I thought I had something completely figured out only to find I was in error, I wouldn't be as concerned about the gradual erosion of my retirement fund.

I had such an experience yesterday during a staff meeting. In the past couple years, I have struggled with the the notion of assessing reading at the middle level. The Common Core Standards require assessments of content far beyond a student's reading level, encompassing everything from comparisons of similar texts in different forms to evaluating an author's choices of evidence. Reading level is not directly referenced until the tenth Learning Target of both Reading Measurement Topics (Reading Informational Text and Reading Literature). To date, my approach has been to ignore text complexity until I assessed that tenth Learning Target. This has worked well, giving what I perceived as a clearer picture of just what a student can and can not do related to reading (rather than just a student's ability to read).

I noticed the first credible signal that my approach to reading assessments could be in error during a meeting in which staff were shown the latest Educate public releases from the Maine Cohort for Customized Learning. This latest release included the text complexity requirements of the tenth reading Learning Target within each of the earlier Learning Targets. This was obviously a departure from my prior thinking.

In a follow up conversation with a colleague, she suggested that including the text complexity requirement within each assessment would provide a clearer picture of each student's current skill and knowledge level. This becomes clearer when you look at correlating Learning Targets over levels. The Learning Targets are remarkably similar as they progress through the levels (previously grades, but ultimately levels of student skill and knowledge). Adding a text complexity component to each of those Learning Targets provides more information. With text complexity in the mix it is possible to identify and share not just if a student can, for example, compare similar texts in different forms but also the complexity of text with which a student can still successfully perform that task.

This makes sense. Of course, it is still important to provide each student with readings at their instructional and independent reading levels. Yet, text complexity probably has a greater role to play in assessment than simply the tenth Learning Target.  (More on this in a future entry.)

This idea requires greater thought on my part and is a good reminder to constantly be on the lookout for the complacency that can come with having figured something out. In short, none of us knows it all, and we all have a lot to learn.

The Power of Reflection - LTP

I recently read a summary of John Medina's Brain Rules. The author makes many good points, but my favorite is that intentional reflection is important to real, long term knowledge acquisition. This point resonated with me because I've seen the value of reflection up close and personal in my students' Learning Target Projects (LTPs).

As I explained in an earlier entry, my students work through the Learning Targets independently. Periodically, students are required to reflect on prior Learning Targets and to create an LTP. This project can be just a review of the taught and learned content, or it can go beyond that learning into related content and/or result in a unique representation of the content.  Here are some examples of LTPs students have created:

• A video explanation of the difference between stated and implied information
• A hyperlink immigration educator (think interactive info kiosk)
• A 3D model of a sandwich with attached info representing the organization of text
• A flowchart poster showing the history of changes to American government
• An Alaskan volcano recreated in a Minecraft virtual environment
• A picture book of a student-authored narrative
• A conversation with a teacher about U.S. citizenship
• A homemade playdough sculpture/map of an archipelago
• A board game about the U.S. Constitution
• A preprogramming (Scratch) animation explaining how the stock market works
• An electronic concept web showing the causes, turning points, and effects of the Civil War
• A comic describing the immigration experiences of the late 19th and early 20th centuries
• A hyperlink quiz about the branches of U.S. government
• A woven Penobscot basket covered with info about Maine
• A snow sculpture of a fault drop mountain

Some of these projects were stellar.  Others...well...not so much. However, the important part of the LTP is not the product itself. Rather, what is important is the reengagement with and extension of learned content. Pretty projects are nice and usually quite engaging, but the real benefit of an LTP is that students are required to spend time reflecting on the standards they have just met or exceeded. In our hurry up and do the next thing world, reflection is often cast by the wayside. That's a shame because it is that reflection that helps lock content into the long term memories of many students.

The LTP reinforces the point that school is not just about passing assessments; it's about learning, creating, and (hopefully) remembering.